Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Truehope


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  essay  // 00:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Truehope

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Company is not notable, reads somewhat like WP:G11 The Determinator  p  t  c  00:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets GNG as there are reliable sources, although the article is somewhat adverty. Electriccatfish2 (talk) 00:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep The company lost their constitutional fight in Canada's Supreme Court. Their fight against the Canadian government to market their products continuesdrtap4 (talk) 10.00, 9 July 2012 (UTC) — drtap4 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment - Please support your keep Vote! with a valid Wikipedia based reason. Because the, "company [was] blamed for death of patient" is not a valid reason.  Losing a "constitutional fight in Canada's Supreme Court" does not automatically make them notable.   Please see WP:ORG.  red dog six  (talk) 20:21, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Non-notable company lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. References are trivial in nature.  The reliable sources mentioned in the "keep" comment are only passing mentions of the company.   red dog six  (talk) 01:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Public needs to be warned about this company. Health Canada warnings about this company ongoing.As the sister of the deceased my reasons are valid and an inquest is pendingdigitel9598 (talk)(UTC) — digitel9598 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. --Digitel9598 (talk) 21:01, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - Please provide a valid reason for keeping the article. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a warning system.  I am sorry for your loss, however, this is not a valid Wikipedia reason for inclusion in Wikipedia and it is certainly not an unbiased opinion.  red dog six  (talk) 22:43, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Agreeing with Electriccatfish2 in part. Although I don't think the article reads like an advertisement. This company's 'medicines' have been linked to and appear to have precipitated a murder. Doesn't exactly reflect well on Truehope. The news sources might be considered reliable, but even these are supplementary to the main reference, which is a publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The number of news articles on the subject serves to illustrate that this is something people are interested in. Another reason to keep. evan.morien (talk) 02:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete No sources indicating notability returned via Google web or news searches. None of the references in the article establish notability.  MisterUnit (talk) 14:57, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Not notable enough as per other comments, and as per when this article was deleted 6 months ago. It has not become more notable in only 6 months. —Thempp (talk) 20:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete (in its present form) It appears to be written for the sole purpose of WP:SOAPboxing. See the author's remarks here and the comment above.  If an NPOV article that is actually about the company can be constructed from the sources then I'd change to "weak keep" (the coverage still seems fairly scant).--William Thweatt TalkContribs 03:33, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak delete per WP:NOTADVOCATE. --→gab  24 dot  grab← 15:04, 17 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete for the reasons above. Though without prejudice for recreation, though the sources are insufficient, the subject matter suggests it may achieve notability in the near future. Trusilver  06:53, 18 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - The coverage cited in the article seems to meet GNG for me. There is quite a bit of national news coverage about the murder incident.  A google news search for Truehope yields many articles.  The article are not exclusively about Truehope, but some of them do cover it in a significant way. -Scottywong | talk _  16:21, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.